What time does the Resident read his statements today?
TANX
We The Media, [09.09.21 09:52]
[Forwarded from Red.Pill.Pharmacist (Red.Pill.Pharmacist)]
[ Photo ]
Curious timing. 🧐
—
Sen. Amy Klobuchar says she was diagnosed and treated for breast cancer this year
In a post on Medium, the Minnesota Democrat said doctors discovered "white spots called calcifications during a routine mammogram" in February, leading to her having a biopsy done at Piper Breast Center in Minneapolis and learning that she had Stage 1A breast cancer.
Klobuchar said she later underwent surgery to remove the cancer and completed radiation treatment in May.
Full Article: https://cnn.it/3hAxAvl
@RedPillPharmacist
We The Media, [09.09.21 09:16]
[Forwarded from Disclose.tv]
[ Photo ]
JUST IN - China orders the release of the national crude oil reserve to stabilize the domestic market for the first time in history.
@disclosetv
We The Media, [09.09.21 09:52]
[Forwarded from Red.Pill.Pharmacist (Red.Pill.Pharmacist)]
[ Photo ]
Curious timing. 🧐
—
Sen. Amy Klobuchar says she was diagnosed and treated for breast cancer this year
In a post on Medium, the Minnesota Democrat said doctors discovered "white spots called calcifications during a routine mammogram" in February, leading to her having a biopsy done at Piper Breast Center in Minneapolis and learning that she had Stage 1A breast cancer.
Klobuchar said she later underwent surgery to remove the cancer and completed radiation treatment in May.
Full Article: https://cnn.it/3hAxAvl
@RedPillPharmacist
EWillHelpYou, [09.09.21 03:38]
[ Photo ]
In order for victims of Jeffrey Epstein to recieve compensation from the Epstein Victim's Compensation Program set up by his estate, they have to sign away their right to testify against Ghislaine Maxwell.
-
The Epstein Estate has paid out $125 million (so far) to about 150 individuals through this court-approved "voluntary compensation program".
-
Meaning for slightly less than a million dollars a piece, they have silenced 150 witnesses that might have otherwise testified against Ghislaine Maxwell, or in one of the other 7 lawsuits still active against Epstein.
-
If this sounds shady and sort of illegal, the people who created it have a history of covering up terrible things through "compensation funds"
It was designed by Jordana Feldman, who served as deputy special master of the horribly corrupt September 11th Victim Compensation Fund.
And Kenneth Feinberg who oversaw the very same Sept. 11 fund AND the "compensation" fund for sex abuse victims of the Catholic Church.
They are buying off victims.
Do not attend in DC on September 18th.
—
The IC has violence locked and loaded.
--
Multiple agency informants have leaked to me that the event will be used to push "domestic terrorism" law forward.
The America Project caught up with Liz Harris and Seth Keshel after their appearance on Steve Bannon's War Room to discuss the Canvass report further and the specific details about critical aspects of that report. Here is the exclusive content: https://video.americaproject.com/watch/2021
Jim Watkins, [09.09.21 10:14]
[ File : 8kun-Jan-6-Committee Response.pdf ]
The 8kun.top response to the January 6 committee Please share this: No confidentiality designations were attached to the congressional request and we are free to share what we'd like with the public (who should know what's going on in their government)
file:///C:/Users/j/Desktop/8kun-Jan-6-Committee%20Response.pdf
1629 K St NW Ste. 300
Washington, DC 20006
www.barrklein.com
September 7, 2021
One Hundred Seventeenth Congress
Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th
Attack on the United States Capitol
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Re: Select Committee 8kun Inquiry
Chairman Thompson and Members of the Committee:
We write in response to your letter dated August 26, 2021 asking 8kun to produce a broad range of
information related to “[m]isinformation, disinformation, and malinformation related to the 2020
election.” Without doubt, it is the duty of all citizens to cooperate with congressional efforts to obtain
relevant facts needed for legislation. Equally so, it is incumbent upon Congress to respect the
constitutional rights of the witnesses it calls upon. To be more direct, the “Bill of Rights is applicable
to investigations as to all forms of governmental action.”1
8kun will respond to appropriate requests issued by this Committee. But as the Supreme Court
reminded Congress just last year, congressional investigatory and subpoena requests are valid only
when they are “related to, and in furtherance of, a legitimate task of Congress and must serve a valid
legislative purpose.”2 Because of constitutional and pertinence concerns, we seek to narrow and better
identify the information this Committee would like produced.
-
Introductory Constitutional Principles
Congress has sporadically wrestled with contentious issues of the day by means of investigatory
committees. Unfortunately, Congress also has a history of abusing that power through targeting
disfavored political actors and associations.3 This is forbidden by the First Amendment and the Due
Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.4
a. New Deal and “Un-American Activity” Analogues
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and Supreme Court struck down congressional investigatory
attempts to chill political speech and association in U.S. v. Rumely. There, the New Deal Congress was
2
irritated with the conservative agitator Dr. Edward Rumely and the Committee for Constitutional
Government (“CCG”). They organized business opposition to New Deal legislation, perhaps too
effectively.5 The House Committee on Lobbying Activity demanded the names of anyone who
purchased books, pamphlets, or other literature from CCG.6 The D.C. Circuit found this inquiry to
be outside the power of Congress.7
The Court concluded the House Committee could never be constitutionally empowered to generally
investigate all aspects of lobbying. It could investigate particular abuses, particular people, particular
records, or particular criminal endeavors. But the First Amendment would forbid Congress from
examining, publicizing, or reporting the “names and addresses of purchasers of books, pamphlets and
periodicals” because that would serve as a “realistic interference with the publication and sale of those
writings.”8 The investigation into Rumely and CCG suffered from another malady: the congressional
mandate to investigate was flawed. Congressional desires to examine attempts to influence, encourage,
promote, or retard legislation or to influence public opinion are simply void under the First
Amendment.9
Courts have sometimes upheld limited inquiries where authorizing resolutions are sharply focused
about threats to overthrow the government. But the congressional power to investigate even serious
threats to overthrow the government is not limitless. In Watkins I, Congress stressed the urgency of
its need to root out domestic extremists and to “be informed of efforts to overthrow the Government
by force and violence so that adequate legislative safeguards can be erected.”10 But the Supreme Court
cautioned that broad congressional authorizations for investigations could produce disastrous results:
From this core, however, the Committee can radiate outward infinitely to any topic
thought to be related in some way to armed insurrection. The outer reaches of this
domain are known only by the content of ‘un-American activities.’ Remoteness of
subject can be aggravated by a probe for a depth of detail even farther removed from
any basis of legislative action. A third dimension is added when the investigators turn
their attention to the past to collect minutiae on remote topics, on the hypothesis that
the past may reflect upon the present.11
3
In short, congressional resolutions setting few boundaries on nebulous topics violate constitutional
norms.12
b. Constitutional Limits at Hand: Watkins II13
Forcing raucous businessmen of the 1930s or unorthodox platforms of the 2020s to answer questions
about the most nebulous of topics—the underlying causes of political violence—is an unworkable
congressional command. Worse yet, prying into intimate ideologies and thoughts is a serious censorial
chokehold. As courts have realized, the requirement that one reveal purchasers of books, pamphlets,
or papers marks the start of a surveillance state. And just as courts would not embrace a surveillance
state arising out of congressional investigations in the past, so too is this approach inappropriate today.
Compelling online platforms to share information about users who posted about efforts to “overturn,
challenge, or otherwise interfere with the 2020 election or certification of electoral college results”
chills the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans who were concerned about electoral
integrity during the 2020 election. They have every bit as much a First Amendment right to peacefully
gather with others, exchange ideas, and let their discontent be known by public officials as Rumely and
CCG did.14 Demanding that platforms produce mal-, mis-, or disinformation—terms that are
undefined but that are usually euphemisms for speech the powers that be disagree with—works an
equally pernicious chill against political speech in America. Once government is free to demand the
names of users espousing unpopular, unorthodox ideas, free speech and free press rights on the
internet disappear.
Like the problematic scope of inquiry in Watkins I, the present inquiries at hand here in “Watkins II”
are just as troubling. Where Congress sets out to investigate nebulous topics like “subversion and
subversive propaganda,” unlimited “influencing factors” behind the January 6 attack, or how misogyny
and racism might impact political violence, constitutional problems grow exponentially.15 But the
scope of this authorization is beyond Congress’s power due to its invasion into protected First
Amendment rights and its failure to offer pertinent queries related to its otherwise legitimate
concern—the spread of real political violence. Much like Rumely, particular queries focusing on
4
particular people, particular records, or particular criminal acts may be examined. Fishing expeditions
into the closely-held thoughts and beliefs of the American people rest beyond Congress’s prying eyes.
The controversies surrounding the 2020 election, well settled within the Beltway, are hardly settled for
many Americans. Roughly one-third of Americans—almost 110 million people—believe that
President Biden’s 2020 victory was the result of widespread voter fraud.16 The First Amendment
encourages citizens to debate and talk about issues of self-government—without fear of the
government collecting and pouring over their communications. As Congress continues in this
direction, some citizens will fear to espouse, and some will fear to read, messages that those in power
dislike. The million-fold eyes of Argus Panoptes become a reality by congressional fiat.17 The resulting
shadow the government will cast over online discussion that does not conform to the dominant party’s
narrative should frighten every American.
-
Past Compliance with the Committee on Homeland Security
Mr. Watkins, as a representative of 8kun (formerly 8chan) freely appeared before the House
Committee on Homeland Security in September 2019 to address that committee’s concerns over the
proliferation of online extremist content. In doing so, 8kun produced relevant documents and Mr.
Watkins answered relevant inquiries about the site’s operations. We attach the submitted
“Congressional Primer on 8chan” for your reference as ADDENDUM A. Notably, 8kun included
more than fifty pages of voluntary interactions with law enforcement about particular criminal
investigations. Where requests are focused and particular and do not run afoul of constitutional norms,
8kun is enthusiastic to aid Congress and law enforcement in their operations. We hope we may be
equally helpful here.
-
Clarification of Existing Requests
It is Mr. Watkins’s desire that we continue 8kun’s practice of responding to lawfully issued requests
and to provide as much respectful cooperation with your committee’s investigation as the First
Amendment allows. However, the requests contained in your form letter dated August 26, 2021 are
an unworkable starting point for cooperation. For example, item 1 requests production of “All . . .
data . . . regarding your platform . . . .” Even if this sentence is read in conjunction with the items
described in items “i.” through “iv.,” this request is so broad as to render compliance impossible.
Other form requests, such as requests for “internal or external reviews and reports” regarding 8kun’s
“algorithms” seem misdirected. 8kun is a small organization and a relatively simple website. There are
no “internal or external reviews” nor are there website “algorithms.” This is but an entrée of errors—
the requests, as written, need substantial clarification and focus for 8kun to attempt cooperation.
Please contact Mr. McDonald at your convenience to discuss your requests and determine if there is
any specific information that the Committee is constitutionally empowered to seek and that Mr.
Watkins is capable of producing. Alternatively, 8kun may be accessed through the internet at
https://8kun.top/index.html. All of the information the Committee appears to seek is likely available
in an open manner for viewing on the website. Should any substantive issues arise over related
constitutional concerns, please contact Mr. Barr directly.
Jim Watkins, [09.09.21 10:24]
I posted this to my gab and gettr as well. https://gettr.com/post/pajbmj7459
James Woods, [09.09.21 06:54]
I once read a book that warned me about a system that would prevent you from participating in the economy unless you had a mark.
Some might even call this a Good Book.
More people should read it.
Join @JamesWoodsOfficial
SantaSurfing, [09.09.21 10:41]
[Forwarded from Disclose.tv]
JUST IN - Police, prosecutors raid the German Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Justice. There is suspicion of obstruction of justice in office.
@disclosetv
We The Media, [09.09.21 11:01]
[Forwarded from X22 Report Official]
Couple of days ago
FBI warns of ransomware attacks targeting food and agriculture sector as White House pushes for proactive measures
https://www.zdnet.com/article/fbi-warns-of-ransomware-attacks-targeting-food-and-agriculture-sector-as-white-house-pushes-for-proactive-measures/
Today
Biden blaming food suppliers for inflation
[FF] Incoming
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/biden-administration-now-blames-meatpackers-soaring-food-costs?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29